ML20203C356
| ML20203C356 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1998 |
| From: | Dicus G NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203C348 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-64FR19868 AF62-2-051, AF62-2-51, SECY-98-266-C, NUDOCS 9902110391 | |
| Download: ML20203C356 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _.. _. _ _ _.... _ _ _..... _.
t l
NOT ATION VOTE L.
RESPONSE SHEET l
l TO:
John C. Hoyle Secretary of the Commission i
FROM:
COMMISSIONER DICUS l
SUBJECT:
SECY-98-266 - REQUIREMENTS FOR INITIAL OPERATOR j
LICENSING EXAMINATIONS Approved X in part Disapproved X in part Abstain j
Not Participating Request Discussion COMMENTS:
See attached.
1 i
l' dw bou Q
SidNAT4jRE Release Vote /
X/
~ ~ -
l m hwn 11 R9W DATE Withhold Vote /
/
l l
Entered on "AS" Yes X No l
i 9902110391 990209 PDR ComS letCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR 98 2 // S$Y/
Commissioner Dicus' Comments on SECY-98-266 I approve the proposed changes to 10 CFR 55 as proposed by the staff, subject to the following comments:
1.
If a large number of licensees elect to develop their own exams, licensees will continue to gain experience in exam development, while the NRC examiners, with fewer opportunities to develop exams, may not be able to maintain their proficiency at the same level it is today. As a result, the level of difficulty between licensee developed exams and NRC developed exams may begin to diverge.
In the Commission's 12/17/96 SRM to SECY-96-206 pertaining to the proposed rulemaking, the staff was directed to ensure that examiners maintain proficiency by writing at least one initial operator licensing examination per calendar year in each NRC Region. The intent of this requirement was to ensure all qualified examiners that administer exams were able to maintain their proficiency. Based on the above, the staff should monitor exam results to ensure the exams developed by the NRC remain at a comparable level to that of licensee developed exams. If the staff identifies a decline in examiner proficiency, additional training in exam development should be included in the examiner continual training program.
2.
I agree with Commissioner Merrifield's comment regarding the restrictions in interim Rev. 8 to NUREG-1021 placed on facility personnel who can participate in developing the initial operator licensing examinations. These restrictions are more limiting than what has been imposed on licensee personnel involved in the development of requalification exam materials, and is an undue burden on facility licensees with minimal benefit. Therefore, I believe the restrictions placed on initial exam development in interim Rev. 8 to NUREG-1021 should be modified prior to issuance of the final Rev. 8 to be consistent with the requalification exam development restrictions. However, the staff should continue to monitor licensee programs and recommend additional restrictions on initial exam development in NUREG-1021 if actual exam development problems are identified.
I disapprove the proposed changes to the enforcement policy for the following reasons:
First, the staff should reevaluate the proposed examples to determine if the examples cover the spectrum necessary to ensure consistent application of the enforcement policy and that the technical and regulatory significance have been appropriately considered. For exhmple, the staff has not made a compelling argument as to why identification of exam compromise immediately before an exam is administered and identification immediately following exam administration constitutes the difference between a Level IV and Level lil violation. However, if the compromise is identified after licenses are issued, the situation may be more severe, and if it is determined that one or more of the operators granted a license didn't possess the requisite knowledge and abilities to operate the associated facility, an even higher severity level may be warranted.
_~
j l
. Second, the staff included in its example of a Level til violation, a case where the compromise
(
was willful. The treatment of willful violations, including the factors that should be considered when determining the severity of a willful violation, is already addressed in Section IV, " Severity l
of Violations", of the enforcement policy.
i l
l 1-
- )
Y i
f'
\\
l L
i i
l.
l f
l 4
,